home

Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Issues Disclosed

By Jeralyn, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Mon Sep 05, 2005 at 12:06:23 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Crooks and Liars has results of a CBS poll from last week:

In a shift from July, the public now thinks the Senate should consider a Supreme Court nominee’s positions on issues in addition to his or her legal background. According to last week’s poll, 57% said a nominee’s opinions on issues should be considered, while 33% thought the Senate should consider only a nominee’s legal qualifications and background. Even more Americans said a nominee’s position on the issues should be considered than did so during the nomination processes of Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork

< Thousands Return to New Orleans, Bush Clears Calendar | Monday Afternoon Katrina Links >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Issues Disclosed | 20 comments (20 topical)
    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#2)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:08 PM EST
    PW-Yes but you would have us believe that any question of substance should fall into the "opinions before the case is argued" category. Ginsberg showed us that a SC nominee can answer important questions that are on American's minds without compromising pending cases. The advise and consent is a check and balance. Arguing that it is the opposite is just silly.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#1)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    If nominees provide opinions before the case is argued, and congress has consent over a nominee; doesn’t the court then becomes a fairly weak check on the legislature?

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#3)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    What would the questions of substance be then? A legislator with an itch to draft legislation that may be reviewed by the court and the ability to give a nominee an up or down vote based on their views of this to be drafted legislation is in a very sweet position. Justice Ginsburg may have answered questions ‘on American’s minds’ that were inconsequential to future cases, but she certainly answered question that gave legislators a very good idea of how she might view future abortion regulation. I think it is best to stick to questions about qualifications and the machination of the opinion process. I hate to see those sleazebags in congress get the smallest toehold on the court.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#4)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    pigwiggle: Do you consider the following question to be off limits: "Do Americans have a inalienable right to privacy"?

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#5)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    glanton: Do you consider the following question to be off limits: "Do Americans have a inalienable right to privacy"? I know you asked the question of pigglewiggle... Personally, I don't think it is off limits. And it raises another good question: Are personal political views fair game or not in job interviews in any other field? And another: Is there protection under law against that line of questioning generally?

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#6)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    glanton- I don’t know, depends on the context; although it seems too broad to be of much use. I am specifically concerned about legislators getting a preview of the treatment their legislation will get by a given nominee. I think it’s best if nominees refuse to answer those kind of questions.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#7)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    pigwiggle, Well, Roberts is probably going to be the guy for you, then, because from what I'm seeing the chances of him answering even such a basic question as the one I suggest are nil. Personally, I don't care what they ask or don't ask him. No need to even watch the hearings. Like anyone else who's been awake for the last five years, I know what I'm getting with Bush. "et al": We all know the answer to these questions. I'd lay my life that this President would never nominate someone who believes we have a right to our privacy. Bottom line: Roberts and whomever else Bush nominates will slide through easily and their combined tenures will amount to yet another kick in the balls for American Civil Liberties. Not that there's that much left to be kicked.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#8)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    PW-those legislators are supposed to be passing bills that reflect the will of their mandate. I agree that this does not always happen, and they may not get re-elected because of their bad judgment. If qualifications were all that was important Roberts should be immediately rejected. He has little experience deciding things on his own; isn't that the big defense that his apologists have for him, "he was only working for his clients as any good lawyer would do." If you do not like the system, as your pals on the right seem not to, fascism, monarchy, or some combo would solve your problems.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    Bush wants his buddy Roberts, with two years on the federal bench he put him on -- and NO other experience as a judge -- to be the Chief Justice. Roberts is the under-qualified FEMA chief for the Supreme Court. Nevermind the disaster. Rightwing cronyism is all that matters to the Traitor-in-Chief.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#10)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    Glanton-
    “Like anyone else who's been awake for the last five years, I know what I'm getting with Bush.”
    I bet folks said the same of Justice O’Connor. Squeaky-
    “those legislators are supposed to be passing bills that reflect the will of their mandate.”
    Certainly, but it is a mandate provided by a simple majority. The issues that the Supreme Court decides are so important as to need a super majority; constitutional matters. Outlawing flag burning, for example, may (unfortunately) have the support of a transient majority but as it is a matter of free speech I would rather not have congress gaining a ‘backdoor amendment’ through the nomination process.
    “If qualifications were all that was important Roberts should be immediately rejected.”
    The big critique of the review process, unqualified nominees are necessarily nominated as they have a sparse body of opinion. Anyone qualified would have enough opinions for bull$hit partisan wrangling.
    “If you do not like the system, as your pals on the right seem not to, fascism, monarchy, or some combo would solve your problems.”
    You really have no clue where I’m coming from.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    "I bet folks said the same of Justice O’Connor." Why, did she start a war over lies? Did she defend the country with TWO fighter jets an hour late, while she sat with his peers eating cookies? Did she diddle the guitar while people's parents drowned in their nursing homes? You're worse than an idiot, pigwiggle. You're the dishonest beast who puts party and power above all else.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#12)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    pigwiggle, Come on now, that's not really a response. I think we'd all be better off if we stopped pretending with these judicial appointees. It's like when PPJ a few months back submitted that we couldn't assume how the Senate would vote on Owen and Brown. We surely knew the results beforehand then, and just as surely we know them now. All that's left to discuss here, in my view, is what we think about those results.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#13)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    “Come on now, that's not really a response. I think we'd all be better off if we stopped pretending with these judicial appointees.”
    Sure it is. Look, if President Bush were the nominee you could certainly say we knew what we were getting. Presidents try to nominate folks who are ideologically aligned with themselves, but actually doing it, another matter. And if President Bush’s competency to plumb the ideology of his nominee isn’t far from our estimation of his competency in other matters you should rest easy.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#14)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    I for one do no doubt Bush's competence at forwarding his domestic agenda. How could anyone doubt it, given how far to the Right the entire discourse on privacy and liberty have moved, and how generally less free this country has become in a mere 5 years? When Roberts gets the opportunity to overturn Lawrence v Texas, he'll do it. When he gets the opportunity to finish off Roe he'll do that too. And those are only the two most high profile of scads of examples. Indeed, on issue after issue, from business malfeasances to individual rights he will be barely discernible from Scalia and Thomas. Same with whomever he nominates next. Just watch. But if it makes you feel better to treat Roberts as some kind of an ideological "crapshoot" then be my guest. It's easier and less expensive than a valum addiction, I suppose.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#15)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    PW-It is true, I do not have a clue as to where you are coming from. I do know where the WH is coming from though. The WH is acting like we have a monarchy where the executive branch can do whatever it pleases with no accountability or repercussions. From the little we know of Roberts he believes in expanding the power of the executive branch. Those guys are not your friends. They believe that the people (you and me) and congress are impediments to getting 'things' done. Sounds like a formula for fascism to me.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:17 PM EST
    What difference does it make if Robert's positions are disclosed? Bush picked him. We know where Roberts stands. We know how he will decide.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:18 PM EST
    Robert Horn, Chairman, Republican National Lawyers Association, claimed on C-Span during the "Judge John Roberts Supreme Court Nomination" forum, sponsored by America's Future Foundation, that Roberts has been either a member or involved with The Federalist Society since its inception. Why isn't the media on this? Here's the link to the program: http://inside.c-spanarchives.org:8080/cspan/cspan.csp?command=dprogram&record=185608905 Sorry, no stream to download that I could find, but how could Roberts "forget" that? The hearings should be about The Federalist Society and their agenda, since so many in high places are members.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#18)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:19 PM EST
    I bet folks said the same of Justice O’Connor.
    So what do you mean by that? That we were pleasantly surprised that she was merely conservative instead of radical right?

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#19)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:19 PM EST
    “So what do you mean by that? That we were pleasantly surprised that she was merely conservative instead of radical right?”
    I think most consider her a moderate, Howard Dean for example … “President Reagan had the courage to stand up to the right wing extremists in his party by choosing a moderate, thoughtful jurist.” Here’s what TL thinks of Justice O’Connor, and TL’s list of 4-5 rulings where Justice O’Connor was the decisive vote for what TL considers the correct decision. I think moderate suits her well. Anyway, I’ve made it clear what I mean.

    Re: Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Iss (none / 0) (#20)
    by aw on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:20 PM EST
    O'Connor is relatively moderate. I remember when moderate was really moderate, not merely not radical right.

    Poll: Americans Want Nominee's Position on Issues Disclosed | 20 comments (20 topical)